The Texas Senate on Tuesday rejected all of Attorney General Ken Paxton’s efforts to dismiss the articles of impeachment against him, moving forward with the first removal proceeding against a statewide elected official in more than a century.

The pretrial motions required a majority vote. The most support a motion to dismiss received was 10 out of 30 senators.

  • Curious Canid@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    167
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    As someone who live in Texas for thirty years, I am genuinely shocked that the Texas GOP has managed to find someone who is too corrupt even, for them. I wouldn’t have said that was possible.

    • 0110010001100010@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      93
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wouldn’t be surprise to find out this is some kind of attempt to scapegoat him and draw the eyes away from the rest of their corruption. That’s just the cynic in me thinking out loud though.

        • Vodik_VDK@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          So throw a few people under the bus and use that to make people believe “it is getting better” as you continue to smear shit on yourself.

          This made my brain generate a picture of someone standing naked before a horrified crowd and moaning out, “It’s getting better!” as they smear feces on their body.

          • 4am@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            There’s probably a Burning Man joke in there, but since I know that like 85% of attendees are just artists and festival people and not elite tech bros i kinda feel bad for that whole situation

            • nilloc
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah, it must be a bummer to get rained out like that. I did a bunch of big Maker Faire for many years, and Burning Man had some appeal, but I don’t like being dirty enough to get over that hurdle to attend. And I’m too broke now anyway.

              Also I have an old VW camper and the alkaline playa dirt would really hurt it. (In fact I think the previous owner did go there a few times, the lock tumblers were jammed full of fine powder when I got it).

      • LetMeEatCake@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think it’s simpler.

        As things are in Texas right now, anyone he is replaced with will be a conservative republican. There is zero political risk to republicans in removing him. His only constituency within the party is the furthest right loons… but they tend to abandon “losers” quickly and will happily latch onto the newest far right loon. All while keeping him around does represent a political cost to republicans. That cost has gotten high enough that they’re willing to consider removing him.

        They can remove him with no risk to their power and get rid of a headache at the same time.

    • MC_Lovecraft@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      1 year ago

      The tipping point is that he tried to get the party to pay for the coverup for his crimes. He was spending their money instead of raking it in, and they decided to turn off the tap.

    • TwoGems@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not that. Something is up. Republicans are ruthless, not benevolent. I have a feeling it’s a lot worse than that. Do we know if the FBI is involved? They turned on him pretty quick and we all know how that goes.

    • malloc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s been due (indicted years ago on fraud), but he managed to piss off his own party. It’s rare to see the modern GOP go after one of their fellow ® bearing brothers.

      I wonder what he did because he was a good sock puppet for the GOP.

  • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s a lesson here for the people who want to use Trumpiness to attain political power: if you’re not actually Trump, it won’t work.

    Whatever “it” is, Trump has “it.” It’s to the extreme detriment of our entire nation and world, but there we are. Ken Paxton definitely doesn’t have “it.” I haven’t seen any sparkle of “it” in the other 2024 Presidential candidates (from either party).

    The problem with trying to be Trump but not is that whatever deviation one makes will alienate Trump’s cult and reveal the weakness of Trumpism from a political point of view for traditional Republican politicians. They’ll turn on fake Trumps instantly.

    I don’t know if Trump is going to go down for his crimes, but a lot of his crew will be, because none of them have whatever “it” is. I hope that the juries will take their job seriously and ignore any non fact based stuff from Trump. Who knows. Twelve is a lot of people…

  • blazera@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Havent been following this, Im sure the article will clear up what the impeachment’s about

    The House impeached Paxton in May, alleging a yearslong pattern of lawbreaking and misconduct.

    thank you Texas Tribune for clearing that up.

    • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hope this clears it up.

      Why was Paxton impeached?

      At the center of Paxton’s impeachment is his relationship with a wealthy donor that prompted the attorney general’s top deputies to revolt.

      In 2020, the group reported their boss to the FBI, saying Paxton broke the law to help Austin real estate developer Nate Paul fight a separate federal investigation. Paul allegedly reciprocated, including by employing a woman with whom Paxton had an extramarital affair.

      Paul was indicted in June on federal criminal charges that he made false statements to banks to get more than $170 million in loans. He pleaded not guilty.

      Paul gave Paxton a $25,000 campaign donation in 2018 and the men bonded over a shared feeling that they were the targets of corrupt law enforcement, according to a memo by one of the staffers who went to the FBI. Paxton was indicted on securities fraud charges in 2015 but is yet to stand trial.

      The eight deputies who reported Paxton — largely staunch conservatives whom he handpicked for their jobs — went to law enforcement after he ignored their warnings to not hire an outside lawyer to investigate Paul’s allegations of wrongdoing by the FBI. All eight were subsequently fired or quit and four of them sued under the state whistleblower act.

      Paxton is also accused of pressuring his staff to intervene in other of Paul’s legal troubles, including litigation with an Austin-based nonprofit group and property foreclosure sales.

      What did Paxton get in return?

      In return, the impeachment prosecutors say Paul bankrolled renovations to one of Paxton’s homes and facilitated his affair.

      Paxton privately acknowledged the affair with a state Senate aide in 2018 and told a small group of staff that it was over. But the impeachment prosecutors say Paxton carried on with the woman, who Paul hired in Austin so she could be closer to the attorney general. The developer also allegedly set up an Uber account under a pseudonym that Paxton used to discreetly see the woman.

      After Paxton’s staff revolted, the attorney general rushed to cover up that Paul had paid for costly renovations to his million-dollar Austin home, according to the prosecutors. Paxton’s lawyers released documents showing he paid a company tied to Paul hours after his deputies went to the FBI.

    • Curious Canid@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The problem isn’t that they are being too general. The problem is that they are, among other things, a print magazine. Listing every incident in which Paxton has violated the law would fill a year of issues without leaving room for so much as a contents page.

      • blazera@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        they could summarize beyond “lawbreaking and misconduct”. Or could have saved some space by not saying anything instead, instead of using these words to say nothing.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The Texas Senate on Tuesday rejected all of Attorney General Ken Paxton’s efforts to dismiss the articles of impeachment against him, moving forward with the first removal proceeding against a statewide elected official in more than a century.

    Those senators were Pete Flores of Pleasanton, Kelly Hancock of North Richland Hills, Joan Huffman of Houston, Mayes Middleton of Galveston, Robert Nichols of Jacksonville and Drew Springer of Muenster.

    That motion struck at the heart of one of Paxton’s main arguments — that he cannot be impeached for any actions he allegedly took before he was reelected last year.

    He was immediately suspended from his job and the Senate trial, which started at 9 a.m. Tuesday, will determine whether he is permanently removed from office.

    A simple majority was required to approve them, and Paxton’s team challenged all articles of impeachment both individually and altogether.

    Notably, Patrick granted Paxton’s motion that prevents the suspended attorney general from being forced to testify in the trial.


    The original article contains 447 words, the summary contains 163 words. Saved 64%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!